Club Legend

Beamer is a missing piece, I've missed him and it'll be great to have him back because he compliments our midfield.

Pendles and Wells are Silk.

Bear and Tay Tay are bash brothers (or Conan and little Conan)

Sidey is the pimpernel

Treloar is like Swanny was ... our engine

Beamer has always been decisive. He's a Cold Blooded Killer on field. He sees things and does them. Forget what he's like in interviews, the footy field is where he's at home and once he crosses the white line he's almost Greg Williams. He's a point of difference in our midfield and we will flourish having his tough, decisive manner on the field.

Ofcourse a club wins the flag all decisions essentially become vindicated.
There’s zero room to move.

This way not winning a flag, (which the odds are always against winning flags), means the Beams trade can be called a failure.

Very shrewd tactic.

Ultimately the trade for Beams can only be seen in a context of who Collingwood would have taken in the two picks then watch it all play out.
Ofcourse that itself is too difficult as we’ll not know who we would have chosen.

The trade is specifically designed to win a flag so it IS the measure. If we were mid table it would have been a poor trade - like the Wells deal albeit for salary cost rather trade cost. Paying 2 first round picks for a player his age if you are not challanging for a flag in the remander of his career is ALWAYS dumb.

Re the Lukosius analogy - it is completely different scenario. That trade would have been to facilitate a list rebuild and in your results scenario presumably the failing would have been the balance of the list build strategy. The Beams deal is a spefic opportunity to addrerss something that DID cost us a flag in the season of the actual deal.

We have trded 2 first round picks, justifiably assumed to be both late in the draft order, for a player that had he played in the last GF would very liley have seen us win teh flag. Clearly there are no certainties but that scenario is 100% relevent to te analysis.

Club Legend

The trade is specifically designed to win a flag so it IS the measure. If we were mid table it would have been a poor trade - like the Wells deal albeit for salary cost rather trade cost. Paying 2 first round picks for a player his age if you are not challanging for a flag in the remander of his career is ALWAYS dumb.

what happens if those 2 picks were used on Freeman and sharenberg. would you rather 50 Great games from beams at his age or 0 from freeman and 3 bung knees and from shaz.. ( needs to be said that i Hope shaz comes back love what he did the start of the year "

Brownlow Medallist

The trade is specifically designed to win a flag so it IS the measure. If we were mid table it would have been a poor trade - like the Wells deal albeit for salary cost rather trade cost. Paying 2 first round picks for a player his age if you are not challanging for a flag in the remander of his career is ALWAYS dumb.

Draftee

The trade is specifically designed to win a flag so it IS the measure. If we were mid table it would have been a poor trade - like the Wells deal albeit for salary cost rather trade cost. Paying 2 first round picks for a player his age if you are not challanging for a flag in the remander of his career is ALWAYS dumb.

Norm Smith Medallist

what happens if those 2 picks were used on Freeman and sharenberg. would you rather 50 Great games from beams at his age or 0 from freeman and 3 bung knees and from shaz.. ( needs to be said that i Hope shaz comes back love what he did the start of the year "

The answer is obviously Beams adn I am 100% in favour of recruiting him no matter who we would have drafted BECAUSE we are shooting for a flag. I think May was over priced as well but for the same reason I would have paid the ask.

The price I would pay is always relative to the reward. It is an expensive deal though.

I might add that as a general rule I think picks are over rated and known players that serve a specific need hold much more quantifiable value.

agreed, there are no Guarantees when you pick up young kids, at least Beams is a known quantity. imagine we gave up the holy grail pick 1 for beams it would be WWIII and yet since 2008 let's take a look who we could have taken, and then tell me you would then still be dissapointed

Jacob Weitering - Overrated. got dropped from a CARLTON Side that can't even win a game
Patrick McCartin - if his not concussed then is avg at best
Tom Boyd - That's 10 Million that i'd rather keep in the pocket thanks
Jonathon Patton - 3 knee recos, Big clumsy forward that avg less goals per game then an American that's never played
David Swallow - probably the best out of this bunch but the bar isn't High
Jack Watts - Enough said LOL

In some circumstances it is - eg when you want the father/son & academy players we want this draft it is far more relevent. In a year where that isn't the case then I will always maintain pick 2 is worth much more than pick 10 and 18 (for instance) because of the much higher probability of an outright gun.

I am not so hung on the draft round but rather the pick number. We hope the 2019 first round pick is 18. It could be 1 (unlilkely I know but just to illustrate).

FWIW I think the points alaysis is over done becuse you can't ever make up for not drafting Pendlebury and Thomas at 2 & 5 by taking 15 of whoever was drafted at pick 20 that year. I'd trade double the points difference away to half the pick number if we held pick 10.

Rookie

I voted yes - but I am also happy that we did the trade! We wont actually know if we paid too much for years....

My guess on the whole thing:
Once we nearly went all the way this year; the strategy for the trade period became:
- Maintain the scope to draft Quaynor and Kelly
- Land a genuine star
- Re-sign the players that we want to retain
- See if we can get anyone on the cheap

Steven May was the obvious one; he would have improved us and filled an obvious need. To get him the Suns were asking for a top 5 pick (ended up being 6). To get this done it would have cost us one of Langdon or Moore and pick 18 at least. At this point I am not sure if the club wasn't prepared to trade them, or May let everyone know it was Melbourne or GC, because Moore and Langdon signed and our interest ramped up in Roughead as cheap insurance. Effectively removing us from the May discussion.

Rumours started swirling about Beams but the club hadn't said anything for fear of committing without being able to facilitate a trade. So, without any player collateral, the club set about crunching the numbers to land Beams with draft picks while protecting our rights to Kelly and Quaynor this year. The rest is history!

Ultimately we achieved what we set out to achieve! Arguably our most important signatures during the trade period were Moore and Langdon. Beams didn't cost us those guys because I suspect of all the big names traded he would cost the least in salary so we might have gotten lucky there....

Trading out that first pick next year is a risk, there are no guarantees on our performance and that might come back to bite! But I am glad we rolled the dice because it shows an intent from the club that we think we will be around the mark for a few years yet!!

Winx

I voted yes - but I am also happy that we did the trade! We wont actually know if we paid too much for years....

My guess on the whole thing:
Once we nearly went all the way this year; the strategy for the trade period became:
- Maintain the scope to draft Quaynor and Kelly
- Land a genuine star
- Re-sign the players that we want to retain
- See if we can get anyone on the cheap

Steven May was the obvious one; he would have improved us and filled an obvious need. To get him the Suns were asking for a top 5 pick (ended up being 6). To get this done it would have cost us one of Langdon or Moore and pick 18 at least. At this point I am not sure if the club wasn't prepared to trade them, or May let everyone know it was Melbourne or GC, because Moore and Langdon signed and our interest ramped up in Roughead as cheap insurance. Effectively removing us from the May discussion.

Rumours started swirling about Beams but the club hadn't said anything for fear of committing without being able to facilitate a trade. So, without any player collateral, the club set about crunching the numbers to land Beams with draft picks while protecting our rights to Kelly and Quaynor this year. The rest is history!

Ultimately we achieved what we set out to achieve! Arguably our most important signatures during the trade period were Moore and Langdon. Beams didn't cost us those guys because I suspect of all the big names traded he would cost the least in salary so we might have gotten lucky there....

Trading out that first pick next year is a risk, there are no guarantees on our performance and that might come back to bite! But I am glad we rolled the dice because it shows an intent from the club that we think we will be around the mark for a few years yet!!

The Coach

The club clearly felt the price was acceptable, therefore I felt it was acceptable.

Beams is the same vintage as Sidebottom and two years behind Pendlebury .. so I reckon Beams still has plenty to give.

Obviously the picture will be clearer when we figure out the draft position of Kelly and IQ plus whoever else we pick up. Also when we see that Beams gets on the park and (fingers crossed) stays injury free.

Draftee

Don't think we did.
After Moore and Langdon resigned May was out of the question.
Looking at the trade we got Beamer for this years 1st pick and IQ and Kelly for next years 1st rounder.
I would take that anyday and Roughie was the icing on the cake.
Beamer for 18 is a steal and hopefully we get the 2 academy boys.

Club Legend

This trade has sacrificed the future for a good shot in the short term. I believe we payed top dollar, overpay if you like, but this can be justified by (1) still largely getting what we wanted out of the draft picks left & (2) the benefit we get from Beams. Its similar to the acquisitions of Jolly, Ball, Tarrant and Krak over a short period. No doubt they brought us benefit in the short term, no doubt that cost us over the long term. Truth is I would rather we use draft picks to get another Grundy or Stephenson but the draft is always a bit of a jackpot.

Beams has hugely strengthened our midfield. Roughhead also may turn out to be a critical trade, say similar to bringing in Dunn or Howe - surprising in how much difference they made. How we line up, how we use Beams and whether an all powerful midfield will work/has the game plan to make it work are the key questions to whether we overpayed or not. Based on rumour this trade was planned well in advance so I assume Bucks/the coaching group has a plan to make this a point of difference when most would have thought we'd chase a quality tall.

Soldaat van Oranje

Voted no. More then Beams market price I will admit but I think the costs are justified. He provides that extra scoring option around the 50 mtr mark which is outside most players range. If we can rotate him & Sidey through the fwd line with a fit Elliott to compliment our swoop squad, we will be deadly.